Do you believe fornication should be illegal?

[Christson 24]

Yes or No.

Looking for a discussion here, where Christians share their views on the matter. Some things to note are.
1. How will this benefit society?
2. Is this something God would want?
3. What risks will be eliminated?

I believe when you are married you should stick to your spouse and not engaged in illigal sex which the Bible is against it believe some countries are against it in fact it be could lead to court case if court with another spouse having sex

 

[Christson 24]

I believe that if someone is not married he or she should not engaged in sex because the Bible is against it come to look at it it expose a lot of youth into sexual transmitted diseases eg Aid a lot of people have forget the atrocities that HIV did in the past and still spreading like wide fire if we want our maker Jehovah to be happy with us we need to obey him

 

[MarkSB]

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside.

- 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 (with verse 13 cut short, for emphasis)

So those within the church who cling to idolatrous morals and philosophies are the ones who should be judged by the church, and those outside the church should not? I bet that makes heads spin for all the Christians who push for theocracy and continue to practice and spread political idolatry.

 

[lismore]

fatherless children

Before God formed them in the womb he knew them. A child is a gift from God.

 

[rocknanchor]

Do you believe fornication should be illegal?​

Yes or No?

Patterned fornication?, if need be, the saints should judge. Better yet, get back to the honor of Marriage and no one will have to “spy out our liberty”. Let God recompense misconduct as written. all other has God-given sanctions against and counter to civil "evil".

", , if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, , let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry, , But if they cannot control themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion, , But he who stands firm in his heart, not having necessity, but having authority over the own will, and has judged this in his own heart, to keep his virgin, he will do well (1 Corinthians 7:36,7:9,7:37).​

Many a commentator will fixate on the error well beyond necessity and not the ancient acknowledgement already in place, saying, some who do not possess this required amount of fidelity, seemingly, have no excuse. Theological drivel.

 

[The Liturgist]

So one might ask - What are your goals then?

If the segment of the church that wants to use government to force Christian morals on unbelievers came to the realization that this is not God's will, the church (and dare I say the country and the world) would be much better off for it.

The idea that having human laws consistent with divine morality is against God’s will is a complete non sequitur from the basis of what we did agree on, which was that voluntarily following God’s divine law is better, and that we cannot force everyone to follow them.

Because, granted that we cannot ensure compliance with Holy writ, we can increase compliance with secular legislation, and reap the benefits such legislation would bring. If people were even slightly dissuaded from engaging in fornication, there would be a corresponding reduction in the number of children growing up in single-parent households, the immoral use of contraceptives, and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and all of this would be of benefit.

In addition, if we required fornicators to perform involuntary labor, this could yield enormous economic benefits, by providing a labor force that could be used for infrastructure, or to revive labor intensive industries that in the US have largely died off, such as shipbuilding. I would love to see America capture some of the marketshare currently held by Fincantieri in Italy, and having a robust civilian shipbuilding industry would reduce the costs of maintaining our Navy, and perhaps make us more competitive in selling ships to NATO allies rather than vice versa (at present, the Swedes have a corvette which is stealthy and vastly superior to our Littoral Combat Ships, for example).

Steelmaking and fabrication is another industry worth bringing back home. It is interesting to consider that the loss of US heavy industry, largely due to an uncompetitive labor situation, is at a point to where it would probably be difficult for us to build the F-1 engines used by the Saturn V rockets, which is probably a major reason why the SpaceX Starship is to a large extent following the Soviet Luna design (which they can probably pull off, but eventually we will need larger boosters as the space program develops, and right now China could probably manufacture these, and we probably couldn’t, given industrial facilities presently at hand).

 

[The Liturgist]

Before God formed them in the womb he knew them. A child is a gift from God.

The Orthodox including my friend @HTacianas know this. But we also desire children to have the best possible circumstances growing up. This includes the considerable benefits of having a father.

 

[The Liturgist]

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside.

- 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 (with verse 13 cut short, for emphasis)

So those within the church who cling to idolatrous morals and philosophies are the ones who should be judged by the church, and those outside the church should not? I bet that makes heads spin for all the Christians who push for theocracy and continue to practice and spread political idolatry.

Your interpretation of this verse is odd, but it still doesn’t produce a compelling argument against banning fornication. There are benefits to be reaped, secular benefits.

As for those who engage in fornication, I pray for their salvation. I myself have friends who fornicated, and there was a time in my life when I would have fornicated, given the chance. It is a very easy sin to fall into. But a law could make Christians think twice before violating it, and thus help their own morality, while at the same time bringing benefits to the overall population by reducing disease and fatherless children.

Of even greater importance is the need to ban homosexuality.

Now, I do not propose imposing surveillance to detect when people engage in illicit sex, but rather, what I seek to do is to oppress it, to force sexual perversion back into the state of disreputability it historically occupied, and also to create a labor force in the process which would likely consist mainly of young people unable to control their passions (except in the case of homosexuality, where it would be desirable primarily to prosecute older men who seek to have sex with young men, as this can lead to pederasty, indeed I would argue it is pederasty even if the younger party is above the age of consent).

 

[Matt5]

Yes or No.

Looking for a discussion here, where Christians share their views on the matter. Some things to note are.
1. How will this benefit society?
2. Is this something God would want?
3. What risks will be eliminated?

Let's walk through a scenario that is playing out in real life today.

Take a woman who is rated at around a 5. She is average. Through make-up and dress, she is able to bed a guy who is an 8 or 9. Soon, she really believes that she is around an 8 or 9 because she can bed those guys. She should be marrying a 9 or 10.

Along comes a guy who is a 6. He likes Ms. 5 and would marry her. Except, he is no longer nearly good enough for Ms. 5. She needs to marry a 9. Ms. 5 will date Mr. 6 but shows little interest, and clearly no sex for Mr. 6. Ms. 5 isn't getting much sex either because she is constantly waiting for a Mr. 9 or Mr. 10 to become available.

Soon Mr. 6 is dropping out of the dating pool because he has to spend a lot of money dating and never gets anywhere.

Eventually, Ms. 5 runs out of time and must get married in order to have a baby. She finally settles for Mr. 6 and marries him. But she is not happy that she was forced to settle. Divorce is baked into the marriage from day 1.

Or ...

Or Ms. 5 never settles, never marries and never has babies.

Basically, fornication wrecks societies but slowly. It should be outlawed.

Or Mr. 6 refuses to marry Ms. 5 because he understands that 75% of marriages are unhappy.

Basically, fornication wrecks societies but slowly. Eventually, it must be outlawed.

 

[lismore]

The Orthodox including my friend @HTacianas know this. But we also desire children to have the best possible circumstances growing up. This includes the considerable benefits of having a father.

Hello! Thanks for your reply. Yes I agree. I'm just thinking that this doctrine should not be taken too far though, if a family with a fatherless child join the church, there's nothing that child can instantly do about it. We need to encourage that child. I have seen congregations where anyone apart from middle-class nuclear families do not feel welcome. God Bless You

 

[The Liturgist]

Hello! Thanks for your reply. Yes I agree. I'm just thinking that this doctrine should not be taken too far though, if a family with a fatherless child join the church, there's nothing that child can instantly do about it. We need to encourage that child. I have seen congregations where anyone apart from middle-class nuclear families do not feel welcome. God Bless You

On this we agree entirely. Any church which is hostile to single parents and their children is not practicing what I regard to be Christianity.

 

[rocknanchor]

Yes or No.

Looking for a discussion here, where Christians share their views on the matter. Some things to note are.
1. How will this benefit society?
2. Is this something God would want?
3. What risks will be eliminated?

", ,God-given sanctions against and counter to civil "evil".

In addressing item #2, the far more significant part of this discussion, the above reference to Romans-13 doesn't wait for confirmation of what possible synonym may be included.

 

[Beulah1$]

Your interpretation of this verse is odd, but it still doesn’t produce a compelling argument against banning fornication. There are benefits to be reaped, secular benefits.

As for those who engage in fornication, I pray for their salvation. I myself have friends who fornicated, and there was a time in my life when I would have fornicated, given the chance. It is a very easy sin to fall into. But a law could make Christians think twice before violating it, and thus help their own morality, while at the same time bringing benefits to the overall population by reducing disease and fatherless children.

Of even greater importance is the need to ban homosexuality.

Now, I do not propose imposing surveillance to detect when people engage in illicit sex, but rather, what I seek to do is to oppress it, to force sexual perversion back into the state of disreputability it historically occupied, and also to create a labor force in the process which would likely consist mainly of young people unable to control their passions (except in the case of homosexuality, where it would be desirable primarily to prosecute older men who seek to have sex with young men, as this can lead to pederasty, indeed I would argue it is pederasty even if the younger party is above the age of consent).

 

[Beulah1$]

I find this question to be fascinating, as well as disturbing. Sex, or as the writer says, "fornication," between two people can never be legislated, let alone regulated. Any type of legislation therein becomes government over-reach. While there are a million and one things I don't condone as a Christian, having the government involved in an individual's personal private life, rises to the top of my list. The government already has a number of crises to deal with, and those crises grow by the day. I doubt most people would consider fornication a legislative issue to take up. Upon creation, the first right God gave us was "choice" - to serve Him, to follow Him, to listen to Him. While we humans make ridiculous, miserable choices every day, choice is still an inherent right - one that comes with moral and sometimes legal consequences.

What I'm wondering is how, exactly does one go about making fornication illegal? Do we set up a morality department that follows people around stalking them and their habits? There are millions of people on this earth (we can't oversee all the single ones). The second thing is what are the penalties for engaging in illegal fornication: Are the parties jailed? Or stripped naked and made to walk through the streets with the letter "F" tatooed on their forehead? Jesus didn't judge the woman caught in adultery/fornication. He advised her to quit sinning. I know a number of single people who fornicate. My job is to pray for them and live a life before them that glorifies God. If they ask my opinion, I'll certainly give a Christ-based response. But it's not for me to judge them, nor punish them. We don't stand in the place of God.

 

[The Liturgist]

What I'm wondering is how, exactly does one go about making fornication illegal? Do we set up a morality department that follows people around stalking them and their habits? There are millions of people on this earth (we can't oversee all the single ones). The second thing is what are the penalties for engaging in illegal fornication: Are the parties jailed? Or stripped naked and made to walk through the streets with the letter "F" tatooed on their forehead?

I don’t propose to execute them but to use fornicators for a couple of years as a member of an involuntary public works service somewhat like AmeriCorps (a Peace Corps like organization that engages in domestic projects not unlike the Civilian Conservation Corps).

As far as how to identify them, probably the easiest way would be to monitor social media and seek to correlate this data with hotel room bookings, and also through the operation of conventional police vice squad actions targeting prostitution, which is obviously the most problematic subset of fornication. Also it happens in public with remarkable freuquency.

I do not propose to prosecute fornicators under the age of 21, but fornicators over the age of 21 who deduce those who are underrage would be subject to longer minimum service periods.

Would this result in the arrest of all fornicators? No. But it would have a dissuasive effect.

 

[MarkSB]

I find this question to be fascinating, as well as disturbing.

Some of the responses are certainly disturbing, lol. I'm not even sure if they are to be taken seriously, but they certainly seem serious.

Your interpretation of this verse is odd, but it still doesn’t produce a compelling argument against banning fornication.

So what is the correct interpretation? It certainly doesn't line up with your desire for Christians to be so concerned with the private lives of others that they seek to use the government to police them.

 

[rocknanchor]

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside.

- 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 (with verse 13 cut short, for emphasis)

So those within the church who cling to idolatrous morals and philosophies are the ones who should be judged by the church, and those outside the church should not? I bet that makes heads spin for all the Christians who push for theocracy and continue to practice and spread political idolatry.

Better to have “idolatrous morals” than idolatrous fear of God’s comprehensive will.

God equips “God’s minister to you for good” (Rm 13:4) outside of the church (1 Cor 5:13), but also equips for us, spiritual overseers inside the Church (1 Cor 5:12). Ohh, now I see, both sides of the door are covered by the will of God. If a Christian is “sexually immoral”, that one is to be disassociated with, we have read that many times. But to date, there remains a difference between re-reading easily the things we can accept, and re-reading indigestible passages such that foremost of all, requires our support of both ministers BEFORE we can even begin to discuss what is done with Sodom and Gomorrah types outside the Church.

 

[MarkSB]

Better to have “idolatrous morals” than idolatrous fear of God’s comprehensive will.

"Idolatrous morals" was not the best term to use on my part. (I'm not sure why I chose to use that term.) "Idolatrous belief systems" would be more accurate.

That being said - what you are saying here doesn't make much sense, for several reasons. First, it seems like you're implying that I said God's will doesn't apply outside of the church. Saying that God doesn't want Christians to use the government to try to force Christianity on the population is not the same thing as saying God's will doesn't apply outside the church.

Second - even if I were guilty of idolatry in this circumstance*, this is nothing more than a deflection - and one which doesn't make much sense at all. It's like saying "better to worship golden idols than bronze idols."

(*I would argue that all of us are guilty of idolatry in some way or to some degree, and on a somewhat regular basis... and those who say they aren't are lying to themselves. But when you try selling your idolatry as being essential to Christianity in the manner that we are seeing left/right partisan politics and Christian nationalism being sold at the pulpit in many churches, it becomes especially problematic.)

Better to have “idolatrous morals” than idolatrous fear of God’s comprehensive will.

God equips “God’s minister to you for good” (Rm 13:4) outside of the church (1 Cor 5:13), but also equips for us, spiritual overseers inside the Church (1 Cor 5:12).

I'm not sure how your intending to use Romans 13:4 here - is it in defense of using the government to try to punish fornicators? Because that is what the OP is about, and what some in this thread (whether seriously or not) are arguing for. Just thought I'd ask the question, because you haven't made your intentions very clear.

If you're trying to use Romans 13:4 in defense of that stance, there are many verses which I believe would run contrary to that viewpoint. Not to mention - Romans 13:4 states to submit to governing authorities**. But currently, there are no laws in the U.S. (or in any western nation that I know of, for that matter) which prohibit fornication. And if our government remains democratic, there very likely never will be. So Romans 13:4 currently doesn't (and likely never will) apply. If you want a country where one smaller segment of the population tries to rule over another (rather large) segment of the population with force (and very likely at gunpoint), then I think you need to start looking elsewhere. Again - I'm not sure if this is what you're driving toward - but that is what is being argued for and supported in this thread.

(**And there are exceptions to this in scripture, of course. And I think one needs to understand the context and original Greek, as outlined here.)

Ohh, now I see, both sides of the door are covered by the will of God. If a Christian is “sexually immoral”, that one is to be disassociated with, we have read that many times. But to date, there remains a difference between re-reading easily the things we can accept, and re-reading indigestible passages such that foremost of all, requires our support of both ministers BEFORE we can even begin to discuss what is done with Sodom and Gomorrah types outside the Church.

See my previous points about the will of God... I never said it didn't apply outside the church (quite the contrary, in fact).

The Sodom and Gomorrah comment - I'm not quite sure how to interpret that, either. Do fornicators fall into the "Sodom and Gomorrah" category for you? Do all sexual sins fall into that category? If so, that is painting with a very broad (and very judgmental) brush. Once again - I don't want to make assumptions about what you're saying here - but I think you've made it rather unclear.

 

[discombobulated1]

Yes or No.

Looking for a discussion here, where Christians share their views on the matter. Some things to note are.
1. How will this benefit society?
2. Is this something God would want?
3. What risks will be eliminated?

If I had been asked this Q even 20 years ago, I would have said No or Probably not

Today I say that it should be illegal. The reason why is this: You can create a child doing that. And today, that means or could mean DEATH to the child

I feel that is saying enough, right there.

Then there's this, though. Even if it doesn't mean DEATH of the child, it could mean BAD things for the child. Children should be raised by 2 parents committed to one another. I have seen utter disasters happen w/ single moms/absent fathers.. children prone to violence and lawlessness due to lack of discipline (mothers were not really meant to be the .. ultimate disciplinarian of children)

 

[discombobulated1]

Your interpretation of this verse is odd, but it still doesn’t produce a compelling argument against banning fornication. There are benefits to be reaped, secular benefits.

As for those who engage in fornication, I pray for their salvation. I myself have friends who fornicated, and there was a time in my life when I would have fornicated, given the chance. It is a very easy sin to fall into. But a law could make Christians think twice before violating it, and thus help their own morality, while at the same time bringing benefits to the overall population by reducing disease and fatherless children.

Of even greater importance is the need to ban homosexuality.

Now, I do not propose imposing surveillance to detect when people engage in illicit sex, but rather, what I seek to do is to oppress it, to force sexual perversion back into the state of disreputability it historically occupied, and also to create a labor force in the process which would likely consist mainly of young people unable to control their passions (except in the case of homosexuality, where it would be desirable primarily to prosecute older men who seek to have sex with young men, as this can lead to pederasty, indeed I would argue it is pederasty even if the younger party is above the age of consent).

totally agree. Why does yoursexuality have to be out there in the public anyway? Answer: homosexuals are trying to make people accept it. Good luck with that one, but regardless, I say Do what you choose to do in private (where all sexual acts should be), but don't expect society in general to accept it, much less call it normal, much less allow our children to get into such a lifestyle. Few parents want that